What You Need To Know About UK's Controversial Rwanda Bill
The Rwanda Bill—officially known as the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill—passed on Monday by UK MPs is quite a controversial piece of legislation. But what are the ins and outs of it?
In essence, the Rwanda Bill gives the UK sweeping powers to transfer asylum seekers arriving irregularly to Rwanda for processing, bypassing domestic and international laws in a bid to crack down on illegal immigration.
In The Beginning
The Rwanda asylum plan started out as an immigration policy, first proposed by the British government in April 2022, under former PM, Boris Johnson.
Under the initial plan, the UK—by now—would have sent asylum seekers and illegal immigrants to Rwanda for processing and resettlement.
In return, the UK would have paid Rwanda an “economic transformation and integration fund” of £120 million, as well as an additional funding of £20,000-£30,000 per immigrant.
The stated aims of the initial policy were to decrease the number of migrant crossings in the English Channel and stop human smuggling.
Along the way, it proposed to boost investment and development in Rwanda. But things did not pan out as planned—just simply, the policy faced significant opposition and legal challenges.
A Hue And Cry
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) firmly opposed the policy, calling it unlawful, prejudiced and impractical. Filipo Grandi argued the UK was attempting to shift its burden to a developing country.
Also, there were concerns that Rwanda, which is still grappling with the fallout of the 1994 Tutsi genocide, was not prepared to handle the influx of refugees, as the country itself arguably faces issues of poverty and lack of resources for its own citizens.
In June 2022, a last-minute interim measure by the European Court of Human Rights led to the first planned deportation flight being halted.
A year later, in June 2023, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the Rwanda plan was unlawful.
The ruling was upheld by the UK Supreme Court in November 2023. But the plan was only deferred, not interred.
The Rebound
In the face of these legal hurdles, amid the chorus of condemnations, the Conservative government led by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak refused to back down.
It resubmitted a revised version of the bill to Parliament. Finally this version was passed on Monday, with these key provisions:
It allows the UK government to deport asylum seekers who arrive illegally to Rwanda for their claims to be processed and potentially resettled there.
The bill declares Rwanda a safe country for asylum seekers, binding UK courts and tribunals despite concerns over Rwanda's human rights record.
It limits legal challenges against deportations to Rwanda and empowers ministers to disregard future rulings by international courts like the European Court of Human Rights that may block removals.
Asylum seekers who are deported to Rwanda will have their asylum claims processed there. If accepted, they will be granted refugee status in Rwanda, not the UK. If rejected, they cannot be deported back to their home country by Rwanda.
It overrides previous UK court rulings that found the Rwanda policy unlawful due to human rights concerns and Rwanda's alleged poor refugee treatment record.
Here’s the bottom line—the Rwanda Bill gives the UK sweeping powers to transfer asylum seekers arriving irregularly to Rwanda for processing, bypassing domestic and international laws in a bid to crack down on illegal immigration.
According to UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, the first flight will leave in 10 to 12 weeks, which he said is later than he wanted.
King Charles III, who must now give the Rwanda Bill his royal assent so it becomes an official law, reportedly criticised it as “appalling” when he was still a Prince.
Under the UK's constitutional arrangements, the monarch is expected to remain above the political fray and refrain from publicly expressing personal views on legislation.
In other words, the King would be giving his assent to a piece of legislation that he may disagree with.
